STS-121: Launch target May, 2006 - Griffin

jschaef5 · Mar 1, 2006

That sort of brings up a question. If they have an issue with foam breaking off or a tile issue or anything, will they bring it in over the ocean and land at Edwards or will they do what they did last time and just try to get it in at KSC, weather permitting? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

baktothemoon · Mar 5, 2006

When do they start stacking all the components of the shuttle? "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." John F. Kennedy

nacnud · Mar 8, 2006

nasaspaceflight.com also has this story. ECO sensor change-out to delay STS-121

nacnud · Mar 8, 2006

Oops, I must pay more attention <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

llivinglarge · Mar 8, 2006

Hopefully, the CEV won't be over-wired mess that the Shuttle is. The Shuttle's self-diagnostic routines can be compared to the mentality a stupid child who breaks a bone and makes everybody else take guesses which one...

elguapoguano · Mar 8, 2006

What is the deal with the ECO sensors. I mean isn't this exactly the same problem that plauged Shuttle about this time last year? Was the position or composition or wiring effected by the changes made to the tank? Could this be a design flaw, or shall we say a "re-design" flaw? And why couldn't have this problem been solved in the YEAR since Discovery last flew? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Don't let your sig line incite a gay thread ;>) </div>

nolirogari · Mar 8, 2006

Thanks for the details shuttle_guy. I often wonder what it would have been like if the Saturns had been prep.ed and stacked under the same sort of media microscope that we now see with the shuttle. The worst part is- none of the media looking through the microscope have the slightest idea as to what they are really looking at. The slightest rumor of any sort of "funny" and zoom- they're off to the headlines, but there's no story yet... hey, they don't care.

gsuschrist · Mar 8, 2006

Ridiculous. It's unbelievavble to call this latest Shuttle news as anything but another 3-Stooges sticker on the forehead of NASA engineers. The proof is in the pudding...the Shuttle is a white elephant and a joke. So the Shuttle will fly all the flights planned for the next 3 or 4 years? You expect the media (and taxpayer) to buy that garbage?

llivinglarge · Mar 8, 2006

I'd be happy if NASA could do all planned flights... I anticipate at least 1 flight to be cut.

shuttle_rtf · Mar 8, 2006

>"nasaspaceflight.com also has this story. ECO sensor change-out to delay STS-121" A delay is NOT a sure thing yet. < Yep - short headlines aren't ever fully explanatory <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> To expand on this, that's based on if they press ahead with the change-out (which I'm assuming will be a decision made by the PRCB). The sources we have go with 99 percent, because MAF are insisting (their words) on the change-out. The 17 days change-out (which makes a mess of the May window) comes from sources also, not because that's how long it takes to change-out the ECO sensors, but because Lockheed don't have a process for TPS repair to the aft LH2 dome in the vertical - and they've estimated the process length on top of the ECO change-out timeline. So it's a longer process, with the work in the vertical, then on the transporter in the horizontal, then back on the vertical, etc.etc.

shuttle_rtf · Mar 8, 2006

Well if there is a change-out, then it will delay, if I'm going to trust sources, so "may" would have been going against the info I then wrote. It's expanded in the abstract, which is what abstracts are for. Oooo! Static test. Excellent. Didn't know about that. Thanks

SpaceKiwi · Mar 9, 2006

Ahhh, crap. What's going on with these ECO sensors? Did Michoud have them on the top shelf in the storeroom and someone knocked the box on the floor? The SDC story mentions the possibility of flying with only three certified as operational on this ET ... what is the real likelihood of that scenario though? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who is this superhero? Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bring Back The Black! </div>

elguapoguano · Mar 9, 2006

Sorry Shuttle_guy didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. It's just disapointing when it looks like we're gonna launch (like I predicted, but didn't want to believe) a year after STS-114. I've still got my fingers crossed for the May windows though... : />) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Don't let your sig line incite a gay thread ;>) </div>

tap_sa · Mar 10, 2006

Does the changeout mean hacking through and patching up the insulation of ET? We sure wouldn't want those patches to fail ... again <img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" />

llivinglarge · Mar 10, 2006

That PAL ramp area should be avoided like the plague...

SpaceKiwi · Mar 10, 2006

Yeah, I agree with you on that Tap_Sa. I reckon, once applied, they should avoid removing foam like the plague. I am not familiar with the properties of the foam, but surely a re-application creates a potentially weak point along the joins between old and new? Rather than start 'tampering' with this ET, what are the prospects for shipping another from Michoud in time to meet the processing flow for the next launch window? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who is this superhero? Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bring Back The Black! </div>

shuttle_rtf · Mar 10, 2006

Thanks for the confirmation SG.....

shuttle_rtf · Mar 10, 2006

>Ahhh, crap. What's going on with these ECO sensors? Did Michoud have them on the top shelf in the storeroom and someone knocked the box on the floor? The SDC story mentions the possibility of flying with only three certified as operational on this ET ... what is the real likelihood of that scenario though?< What I'm told (for what it's worth) is that MAF/MSFC/Lockheed are totally against the 3 out of 4 LCC on the ECOs. That was part of the basis I ran with the 99 percent chance the change-out would occur. The ending of the May window possibility was based on the change-out timeline noted by Lockheed.

tap_sa · Mar 10, 2006

"The area they will enter is on the bottom of the ET. there is no problem from the Orbiter if foams falls off there." That's good news! I reckon the atmospheric conditions are most benign at the bottom thus reducing the chances of patch failure.

erioladastra · Mar 11, 2006

'"What I'm told (for what it's worth) is that MAF/MSFC/Lockheed are totally against the 3 out of 4 LCC on the ECOs. " No one ever seriously proposed not launching with all 4 ECO sensors. The proposal was to change the lCC to alloow a launch with one failed ECO. ' The philosophy in the 70s was to have 4 so that you could be down one and still launch with triple redundancy. Unfortunately, that has evolved into 4 or no go. We are already moving out on the delay.

shuttle_rtf · Mar 11, 2006

>"Thanks for the confirmation SG..... " I said apparently that decision has been made. It is not official yet. < Obviously. I mean you're confirming what others are saying over this. So you're confirming what they are telling me. That is what I meant. /> "What I'm told (for what it's worth) is that MAF/MSFC/Lockheed are totally against the 3 out of 4 LCC on the ECOs. " No one ever seriously proposed not launching with all 4 ECO sensors. The proposal was to change the lCC to alloow a launch with one failed ECO. < That is exactly what I said! MAF etc are against the proposal to change the LCC to allow a launch with one failed ECO (3 out of 4), for reasons documented in the article I wrote in the link on the previous page.

SpaceKiwi · Mar 11, 2006

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />The philosophy in the 70s was to have 4 so that you could be down one and still launch with triple redundancy.<hr /></blockquote> Is anyone aware of figures on the in-flight failure of these sensors? Have situations arisen whereby a sensor has given an anomolous reading after T-0 and before MECO? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who is this superhero? Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bring Back The Black! </div>

SpaceKiwi · Mar 11, 2006

Thanks SG. If your recollection is correct, it's hard not to agree with you guys at KSC on the 3 of 4 LCC. I'd also be curious to know how many times you launched with 3 of 4 prior to Challenger. I imagine that data would add more creedence to the view that it can be done safely. I guess everyone is erring on the side of extra-caution while flight operations are still relatively new post-Columbia. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who is this superhero? Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bring Back The Black! </div>

SpaceKiwi · Mar 11, 2006

Sorry mate, I must have misinterpreted your statement from the previous page? <blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Yes, the Launch Commit Criteria was 3 of 4 good required at the time of the Final Challernger launch. As part of the post accident reviews that was changed to 4 of 4 to launch.<hr /></blockquote> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who is this superhero? Henry, the mild-mannered janitor ... could be!-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Bring Back The Black! </div>

rybanis · Mar 11, 2006

So...could somebody have made some lower-quality sensors? Perhaps they're installing a bad batch on the tanks? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

STS-121: Launch target May, 2006 - Griffin

jschaef5

Guest

baktothemoon

Guest

nacnud

Guest

nacnud

Guest

llivinglarge

Guest

elguapoguano

Guest

nolirogari

Guest

gsuschrist

Guest

llivinglarge

Guest

shuttle_rtf

Guest

shuttle_rtf

Guest

SpaceKiwi

Guest

elguapoguano

Guest

tap_sa

Guest

llivinglarge

Guest

SpaceKiwi

Guest

shuttle_rtf

Guest

shuttle_rtf

Guest

tap_sa

Guest

erioladastra

Guest

shuttle_rtf

Guest

SpaceKiwi

Guest

SpaceKiwi

Guest

SpaceKiwi

Guest

rybanis

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page